JF
AR AND PACIFISM
415
Mr. Orwell, in all his recent writings on the subject, shows a total
inability
to
grasp
the
real nature of pacifism. Let me try, in a few words,
to
enlighten him.
Mr. Orwell is himself a "politician," with a politician's outlook on
things. He consequently sees pacifism primarily as a political phenome–
non. That
is
just what it isn't. Primarily it is a moral phenomenon. Politi–
cal
movements are based on programme and organization. With pacifism,
programme and organization are quite subsidiary. Pacifism springs from
conscience--i.e., from within the individual human being.
"Peace News,"
says Orwell, "follows its old tradition of opposing war for different and
incompatible reasons." There are certainly innumerable reasons why war
should be opposed, but the chief reason is the diabolical nature of modern
warfare, with its diabolical repercussions upon human personality and
values. I am not referring_ only to the act of warfare itself, but the whole
complex of events which is war. The corruption and hollowness revealed
in the prosecution of this war are too contemptible for words. Certainly I
will accept my shine of responsibility for them, but I won't fight in a war
to
extend
that corruption and hollowness.
PJ!rhaps I ought to try and give expression to what many of us paci–
fists
feel about Germany in relation to ourselves, since Mr. Orwell brings
up this point. Needless to say, we have no love for Fascism, and our
entire attitude is one of personal resistance to all forms of Fascism, as
they impinge upon us in concrete form. (Whereas Orwell swallows the
concrete encroachments and waves his arms at a distant bogey.) Not only
will we not fight, nor lend a hand with the war, but the "intellectuals"
amQng us would scorn to mentally compromise themselves with the Gov–
ernment. Orwell dislikes the French intellectuals licking up Hitler's
crumbs, but what's the difference between them and our intellectuals who
are licking
~p
Churchill's? However: we "don't believe in any 'defence of
democracy,' are inclined to prefer Germany to Britain, and don't feel the
horror of Fascism that we who are somewhat older feel." I can only speak
for myself, of course, but surely the 'defence of democracy' is best served
by
defending one's own concrete liberties, not by equating democracy with
Britain, and allowing all democracy to be destroyed in order that we may
fight better-for "Britain"; and Orwell should not need to be told what,
or who, "Britain" now is.
I am not greatly taken in by Britain's "democracy,'' particularly as it
ia
gradually vanishing under the pressure of the war. Certainly I would
never fight and kill for such a phantasm. I do not greatly admire the part
"my country" has played in world events. I consider that spiritually
Britain has lost all meaning; she once stood for something, perhaps, but
who can pretend that the
idea
of "Britain" now ·counts for anything in the
world? This is not cynicism. I feel identified with my country in a deep
sense, and want her to regain her meaning, her soul,
if
that be possible:
but the unloading of a billion tons of bombs on Germany won't help this
forward an inch. The pretence exists in some quarters that, although
Britain has been a sick nation, now, engaged in war, she has "found her
